IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr.M.P. No. 1980 of 2024

1. Kahnaiya Beldar @ Om Prakash Beldar @ Kanhaiya

Beldar, aged about 48 years, S/o Bhuneshwar Beldar, R/o New Shyam Bazar Modidih Basti, Chotanagri, P.O. & P.S.- Shyam Bazar Modidih Basti, Dist.-

Dhanbad, Jharkhand

2. Kanti Devi, aged about 43 years, W/o Kahnaiya

Beldar @ Om Prakash Beldar @ Kanhaiya Beldar, R/o New Shyam Bazar Modidih Basti, Chotanagri, P.O. & P.S.- Shyam Bazar Modidih Basti, Dist.- Dhanbad,

Jharkhand ...... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Ruma Kumari, Aged about 24 years, W/o Saurav

Kumar, D/o Devanand Chauhan, R/o Bhuli, E Block, Sector 111, Quarter 561, P.O.- bhuli, P.S.- Bankmore

(Bhuli OP), Dist.- Dhanbad, Jharkhand

.….. Opposite Parties

For the Petitioners : Mr. Shadab Eqbal , Adv.

Mr. Priyanshu Shekhar , Adv.

Mr. Ayush Raj , Adv. Mr. Mehul Raj , Adv.

For the State : Ms. Priya Shrestha, Spl. PP

For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Kumar Nilesh, Adv.

P R E S E N T

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

By the Court:- Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the

jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 CrPC with the prayer to quash the order dated 05.01.2024 whereby and where under, learned JMFC, Dhanbad has issued the summon against the petitioners after finding the prima facie case inter alia against the petitioners for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 498A, 307, 313, 506, 34 of the IPC and Sections 3/4 of the D.P.Act in connection with the Complaint Case no. 8529

of 2023, is made out.

3. The allegation against the petitioners are that the petitioners respectively being the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant - opp. party no. 2, in furtherance of their common intention with their son namely Saurav Kumar demanded dowry of Rs. 50,000/- and a bike and treated the complainant with cruelty by harassing her with a view to coerce her to meet the unlawful demand of Rs. 50,000/- and by telling her to indulged in prostitution and they will arrange the prospective customers for prostitution. There is also allegation against the petitioners of forcing the complainant to indulge in illegal business of selling liquor and to wash the glass tumblers in which mahua liquor used to be sold illegally by the petitioner no. 1. There is further allegation that the petitioners and the accused persons attempted to murder the complainant. The complainant has also alleged that she was assaulted and abused frequently by her husband with the aid of the petitioners. On the basis of the complaint, The statement of the complainant on Solemn Affirmation and the statement on the inquiry witnesses, learned Magistrate found prima facie case for the said offence, as already indicated above and took up the investigation of the case.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the complainant in her statement on Solemn Affirmation has stated that it is her husband who used to assault and abuse her and was demanding the dowry. It is next submitted that the petitioners are elderly persons and the petitioners have been implicated in this case with oblique motive, hence, the prosecution of the petitioners to the case, is unnecessary and uncalled for, hence, it is submitted that prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed.

5. Learned Spl. PP and learned counsel for the Opp. Party no. 2, on the other hand, vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioners and submit that there are direct and specific allegations against the petitioners of demanding dowry of Rs. 50,000/- and a bike, as has specifically been mentioned in para 3 of the complaint. It is further submitted that there is direct allegation against the petitioner no. 1 of harassing the complainant by forcing her to be involved in illegal sale of liquor; with a view to coerce her to meet the unlawful demand of dowry. It is next submitted that there is also allegation against the petitioner no. 2 of taking away